David Clark: It is inexcusable that mental health treatments are still underfunded

[LeftishBrit]

Mental health problems account for nearly 40% of all illness but only 13% of NHS funds are devoted to their treatment, according to a major report published today by the London School of Economics. This gross inequality between mental and physical health might have been understandable in the 1960s, when we had few effective treatments and much of what was offered was no better, and sometimes worse, than tender loving care. Fifty years on, it is inexcusable.

We now have psychological therapies that have passed the most rigorous scientific tests of effectiveness and are positively recommended for use in the NHS by Nice. Their impact can be remarkable. One statistic that is commonly used to assess the benefit of a treatment is the number of people that need to be treated to obtain one extra person with the desired outcome. For the statins that are so commonly prescribed in the NHS at the moment the number needed to treat is over 90. With psychological treatments for depression and anxiety it is under three.


Economic analyses suggest that making Nice-recommended psychological treatments more widely available would be cost-effective as the savings that are achieved when someone recovers from a mental health problem outweigh the cost of providing treatment. Back in 2007 the government listened to the economic argument and launched the excellent Improving Access to Psychological Therapies initiative for adults. The coalition has continued to support the programme and has rightly started to extend it to children...



Clearly, a change in commissioning attitudes to mental health is required. The existence of effective treatments means that it should finally be supported on a par with physical health. Such a move would make an enormous difference to the one in three families who have a member with a mental health problem. It would also help the economy and make us a better society.


More at link:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jun/18/inexcusable-mental-health-treatments-underfunded

[cbayer]

1. I was not aware that this was happening in the NHS.

Medicare also discriminates against those with psychiatric illness - shameful.

Still, I think it's probably worse here. I have an american friend, married to a Scot and living in England, who had severe postpartum illness and received amazingly great care there. She would not have received anything close to that here, even if she had private insurance or Medicare.

[CanSocDem]

2. Perhaps...

...the NHS has realized that 'mental health' is directly related to 'physical health'.

They may also have stumbled onto the studies that show placebo treatments are every bit as effective as the commonly used pharmacuetical therapies.

Notwithstanding the apparent relief many around here achieve from the variety of modern medical SURE-CURES that are readily available, it appears that good diet and exercise is ultimately the best defence against illness.

And before you get all indignant at what you percieve to be a "right-wing" attack on the heath difficulties of our fellow members of DU, you should understand that the battle to provide "good diet and exercise" is the frontline in the battle for a progressive state.

Taking away the elements and institutions of our industrialized society that feed us crap and make us believe we're lucky to have it, would go a long way to giving the citizenry an opportunity to eat well and exercise frequently.


.

[cbayer]

3. Studies that show that placebo treatments are just as effective?

Can you link to such studies?

Your suggestion that major psychiatric conditions can be adequately treated or prevented with diet and exercise is insulting and harmful to those who suffer from major psychiatric conditions. Would you say the same to a woman with a life threatening breast cancer?

I think it's quite possible for you to make a case for better quality food, nutrition and lifestyles without minimizing and/or marginalizing the suffering of those afflicted with brain diseases.

[CanSocDem]

4. Not to quibble....

...but "just as" might be an overstatement.

Just the same, out of more than 1.8 million hits on google under "efficacy of placebo's" I give you this off the first page.

http://www.srmhp.org/0201/media-watch.html

In a controversial meta-analysis published in 1998, Irving Kirsch and Guy Sapirstein compared the mean effect size changes in symptoms of depression across 19 double-blind studies assessing the efficacy of antidepressant medications. Results demonstrated that placebos reproduced approximately 75% of the improvement found in the active drug. Furthermore, the authors assert that the remaining 25% of improvement accounted for by the active drug is debatable, and could be the result of an enhanced placebo response due to the side effects that patients experience when taking the active drugs, or other nonspecific factors.

What you are saying about our inability to prevent disease is what is most insulting. And, I might add, symptomatic of the religious/free-market belief that we, as human individuals are not capable of managing our own lives.

.

[cbayer]

5. I can see that you and I are worlds apart on this, so I will wish you a good day and a good life.